WHY IS IT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?

I don't get why it is still even being debated about "IF" the Darwin theory is true? It is almost strange to me how people just deliberately ignore the "facts" and the "laws" of nature in order to believe in "Darwinian Evolution".*Non-living matter does "not" reproduce. Non-living matter does not produce "living matter". So how can anyone logically even fathom such an idea. Evidence pointing to creation.*The earth's magnetic field's decay rate is perfect evidence that the earth is only 1,000's of years old. Scientists know that if the earth was older than 10,000 years everything would have melted away. No life would have been able to exist under such an intense magnetic field. ( evidence the earth is less than 10,000 years)*The atmosphere's helium content is evidence to the earth's youth. Helium escapes at a much slower rate than it enters the earth's atmosphere...if all of earth's helium came from the rocks decay byproduct(and all of it didn't) the earth could not be any older than 1 to 2 million years old. Since fusion also produces helium it is actually as the magnetic field shows us much younger.* Whale skeletons on mountains? Sea snail fossils on top of mountains? Sea life bones and fossils on various land parts of the world? Fossils of fish still with prey in its mouth? Fossils of animals in the act of giving birth? (Obvious evidence of Noah's flood and rapid burial...and not slow and long Darwinian evolutionary process)*DNA begins to decay after one dies. Scientists agree that at the rate DNA decays there would be no traceable DNA left after about 10,000 years. Darwin didn't know this of course...as they hadn't discovered this yet...unfossilized dinosaur bones as well as fossilized show traceble DNA. (less than 10,000 years old)*Carbon14 decays at a decay rate that there would be no tracebable C14 in 40,000 years. Dinosaur fossils and unfossilized bones have traceable C14. (less than 40,000 years old)* Red-blood cells also decay at a rate that there would be no more traceable red-blood cells after 10,000 years. Dinosaur bones have been found with red-blood cells. ( evidence that the dinosaurs are less than 10,000 years old)* Haley's comet wouldn't still be coming around if it passed through our solar system anymore than 10,000 years...it has a portion of it melted away every time it passes by our sun.Conclusion: Evidences point to what the Bible has recorded. Evidences are against "Darwinian Evolution". There is obvious design and purpose as well as purposeful function in all of creation.So why is this still being debated? Why is this Darwinian myth so die-hard? This puzzles me. Any comments?

Yes. I would like some instruction on how to proceed as that was an unexpected and pretty harsh response. I just thought that challenging the poster on his posts were what I was doing. I didn't get any response on Proposed New Topics on my question so I thought that I would present it on and during an already started debate. Nevertheless, I did not expect such a harsh response by the administration team. My apologies.

Yes. Actually this post was most helpful and informative. I'm glad to see that the administration team is willing to help out its members get on the right track. Thanks.

Thanks.

AdminBen,Hi. I have tried to make some replies to some of the topics and haven't been able to. Was I suspended or something? I'm not sure I understand what's going on yet. Or are some topics closed? Need help.

I get a "you do not not have reply privileges in this forum" message.Thanks

Thanks.